Screenshot instructions:
Windows
Mac
Red Hat Linux
Ubuntu
Click URL instructions:
Right-click on ad, choose "Copy Link", then paste here →
(This may not be possible with some types of ads)
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(38) |
Apr
(23) |
May
(16) |
Jun
(6) |
Jul
(49) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(12) |
Nov
(9) |
Dec
(5) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(20) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(22) |
Aug
(32) |
Sep
(22) |
Oct
(17) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(9) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(15) |
Apr
(51) |
May
(23) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
(9) |
Aug
(10) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(11) |
Nov
(130) |
Dec
(105) |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:19
|
Feature Requests item #2620157, was opened at 2009-02-20 14:44 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2620157&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ggg (gageorge) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: allow default timeout for all tests Initial Comment: We use junit 4.5 and ant for our build and testing environment and decided it would be nice if all tests without a timeout set could have a default timeout set for them. It would also be nice to see the stack trace of all threads at the time of the timeout. I've been working on a patch to do this and will post it soon. Hopefully this can go into the next release. -Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ggg (gageorge) Date: 2009-03-17 14:42 Message: I've written up the changes I made at http://www.attivio.com/attivio/blog/379-enhancing-junit-with-default-timeouts-and-stack-traces.html I'll try to upload a patch when I get a chance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2620157&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:19
|
Feature Requests item #2775189, was opened at 2009-04-20 00:03 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2775189&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: mykro (mykro76) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: @OnFail annotation Initial Comment: A lot of unit test implementations call for additional code to be executed when a test fails - a dump of more detailed debug logging, for instance. In essence, an @OnFail annotation. The workarounds available in pure Junit 4 (that is, without using JUnit 3 style inheritance) involve modifying every test to either: define a custom @RunWith runner, or set a success flag to be checked in @After. Both of these workarounds are prone to false positive mistakes (ie. forgetting to add the required code to each and every test). An @OnFail annotation, and by extension an @OnSuccess annotation would be a very flexible new feature. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2775189&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:19
|
Feature Requests item #2740918, was opened at 2009-04-07 14:48 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2740918&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Vinicius Fortuna (vfortuna) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Expose ComparisonFailure parameters Initial Comment: I would like the parameters of ComparisonFailure(message, expected, actual) to be exposed via getters. The reason why is that sometimes I have a complex function to assert equivalence between two complex data structures of different types, but to get the assertion messages right, I need to implement the same function again, but changing the order of the assert parameters. To avoid the code duplication, I could just intercept the ComparisonFailure and rethrow with the expected and actual parameters inverted. But I need those parameters to be exposed to do that.. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2740918&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:19
|
Feature Requests item #2383720, was opened at 2008-12-03 17:45 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2383720&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Add discriminator to Description class Initial Comment: It would be nice to have a discriminator value in the Description class to discriminate between two Descriptions with the same name at hashcode-level. Currently the hashcode() of Description is just the "name", however, when using a Description with the same name, this results in the same hashcode and thus Eclipse (and other tools) do not know what Description should be displayed by the running test. Also see: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=BAY109-W33111C18213DA07A338351D7310%40phx.gbl&forum_name=junit-devel Mark. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2383720&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:19
|
Feature Requests item #2680479, was opened at 2009-03-10 22:22 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2680479&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Have Actual results listed even on Passed tests... Initial Comment: Allow for the actual results to be gathered and reported on. We seem to be getting direction from the FDA that "Actual/Observed results" need to be included in all test results. This would require that JUnit provide a way to capture those values and have them as part of the report. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-04-07 12:58 Message: Can you give an example of a test, and what the Actual Results for that test would be? Thanks, David Saff ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2680479&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:18
|
Feature Requests item #2768146, was opened at 2009-04-16 09:43 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2768146&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Johan (compie) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Improve the installation instructions Initial Comment: >From the file junit4.6\README.html 3. test the installation by running java org.junit.runner.JUnitCore org.junit.tests.AllTests. Please remove the dot on the end of that line. Some stupid people (like me) copy/paste the entire line and that won't work. See: http://www.google.com/search?q="Could+not+find+class%3A+org.junit.tests.AllTests."; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2768146&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:18
|
Feature Requests item #2706237, was opened at 2009-03-23 14:22 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2706237&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Damien Cassou (cassou) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Can't extend Parameterized Initial Comment: Hi, I would like to extend org.junit.runners.Parameterized but it's not possible because everything in it is private. Please make the internal types public and the private methods protected. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 2009-06-16 04:27 Message: See http://github.com/phillbaker/junit/commit/5685520c83b347d1e6c74fc7d5a4a7165f307346 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2706237&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:17
|
Feature Requests item #2775213, was opened at 2009-04-20 00:27 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2775213&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: MaxCore and Theories should work together Initial Comment: MaxCore and Theories should work together ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2775213&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:17
|
Feature Requests item #2766423, was opened at 2009-04-15 20:39 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2766423&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Add rudimentary automatic exploration of theories Initial Comment: We won't get full Agitar-style exploration, but some basic strategies can go a long way. This should be done in a way that integrates well with Max(Core) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2766423&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:17
|
Feature Requests item #2785085, was opened at 2009-05-01 14:53 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2785085&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Add aboutToStart() and justFinished() to TestWatchman Initial Comment: Add aboutToStart() and justFinished() methods to TestWatchman, to conceptually add code to the beginning and end of each test. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2785085&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:17
|
Feature Requests item #2785087, was opened at 2009-05-01 14:55 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2785087&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: A Suite can be annotated with an Interceptor Initial Comment: A Suite could be annotated with an Interceptor to be added to all of its tests. This would allow a logger to be attached to all ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2785087&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:16
|
Feature Requests item #2793926, was opened at 2009-05-19 15:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793926&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: verification interceptor Initial Comment: A verification interceptor that provides a "everything worked" extension point, a la jMock. (TestWatchman shouldn't allow you to throw an exception. This one would.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793926&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:16
|
Feature Requests item #2793925, was opened at 2009-05-19 15:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793925&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Interceptor that replicates expected exception Initial Comment: Imagining: @Interceptor ThrownException thrown = new ThrownException(); @Test public void willThrow() { thrown.assertHasMessage("division by zero"); 3 / 0; } ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793925&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:16
|
Feature Requests item #2786193, was opened at 2009-05-03 18:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2786193&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Allow programatic generation of Suite classes Initial Comment: Add an annotation to the Suite class called SuiteMethod that would annotate a method that returns a Class[] array. The Suite would then be built from the two annotations, Suite.SuiteClasses plus any methods on the class (and enforce that they be public, static, take no parameters and return a Class[] array) that are annotated with Suite.SuiteMethod and build the Suite as a combination of all of the Arrays returned. Multiple methods return the same class, my preference would be to only run the class once. An alternative would be to create a separate runner for a class has the @SuiteMethod. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2786193&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:16
|
Feature Requests item #2788992, was opened at 2009-05-08 13:37 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2788992&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Create primer for Custom Runners Initial Comment: There's not yet a great primer that I know of for custom runners in JUnit 4. We've tried to provide examples in the javadoc and test suites, but there's still room for some more article-length documentation. Feel free to ask specific questions, and we'll do our best. If anyone out there is looking for blog fodder, here's a great chance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2788992&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:15
|
Feature Requests item #2793927, was opened at 2009-05-19 15:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793927&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: assertion-gathering interceptor Initial Comment: Create an assertion-gathering interceptor, allowing you to accumulate things that went wrong, and report them all at once at the end. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2793927&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:15
|
Feature Requests item #2815479, was opened at 2009-07-01 22:04 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2815479&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Matt Fowles (fowles) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Description should allow File and Line Number Specification Initial Comment: We use a custom ParentRunner to run tests that are specified via custom xml files for our product. We would greatly like to be able to encode the file and line number of the test in the xml in such a way that we can click on the tests in the eclipse runner and jump straight to the xml file and the line number. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2815479&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:15
|
Feature Requests item #2788990, was opened at 2009-05-08 13:33 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2788990&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Move Theories out of experimental Initial Comment: What would be our criteria to move Theories out of experimental? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2788990&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:15
|
Feature Requests item #2888680, was opened at 2009-10-29 09:59 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2888680&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David North (davidnorthox) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Support failing with an exception Initial Comment: When writing custom assert methods for use in junit tests, it's hard to propagate an exception that caused the assertion to fail. This could be fixed by: - adding an Assert.fail method which takes an exception as well as a message - adding a constructor to AssertionFailedError which takes another exception ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David North (davidnorthox) Date: 2009-10-29 14:17 Message: Not particularly, it's just a bit nicer when running the tests in eclipse to see passes or failures rather than exceptions (which are flagged red rather than blue when running from eclipse, even under junit 4). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-10-29 12:17 Message: In JUnit 4, we've removed the distinction between errors and failures. In this scheme, you would simply rethrow the exception, or let it propagate. Do you find this causes problems? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2888680&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:15
|
Feature Requests item #2840526, was opened at 2009-08-19 19:03 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2840526&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Brian Bonner (bkbonner) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Extend TestMethod and @Ignore Annotation with a Conditional Initial Comment: I'd like to extend the TestMethod code for isIgnored() to include a new Conditional plugin. The conditional would be specified by a Class that implements a Conditional interface that returns a boolean and can take parameters. An example I'm thinking of would be to allow an OfflineConditional which would take a URL that the user could test for the occurrence of this site and skip tests in a TestCase if the site was not available. @Ignore(@Offline("http://www.notthere.com";)) I hope this makes sense. Would this be useful, or can I accomplish this in some other way? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:52 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Brian Bonner (bkbonner) Date: 2009-08-20 14:54 Message: just read this: http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/ReleaseNotes4.4.html And YES, that sounds like it will do the trick. Thank you! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Brian Bonner (bkbonner) Date: 2009-08-20 14:52 Message: I haven't seen that feature, but I will check it out -- the very sounds of it sounds like it may do the trick. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-08-20 14:39 Message: Have you looked at the assumptions feature in JUnit 4? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=2840526&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:14
|
Bugs item #1877429, was opened at 2008-01-22 15:00 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=1877429&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Markus Keller (make) Assigned to: jsuchy (jsuchy) Summary: update Javadocs on http://www.junit.org Initial Comment: Latest Javadocs are not available any more on http://www.junit.org. They have once been made available (see bug 1555652), but currently, there's only http://junit.sourceforge.net/javadoc/ (looks like 3.8.?) and http://junit.sourceforge.net/javadoc_40/ (parts of 4.0) Please restore Javadocs at the old locations, i.e. http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/3.8.1/ and http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.3/ , and add the latest at http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.4/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Steven Buroff (sburoff) Date: 2009-11-17 12:37 Message: I too would like all the javadocs to be available. The zip file for 4.7 does not contain the correct and complete javadocs. I don't understand why that was never fixed and why it seems that every release has an incorrect or incomplete javadoc. Given that it does however, it would seem an important requirement to make correct versions of the javadocs for the latest and several previous releases available at the junit web site. Currently I must generate the javadoc myself from the source and this involves editing the build file. That is an unwarranted waste of time and space. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ian Robertson (iroberts) Date: 2009-11-16 22:55 Message: Created new ticket: http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues/#issue/48 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:49 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ian Robertson (iroberts) Date: 2009-08-24 18:04 Message: With the introduction of Rules, it would be very nice to see javadocs for 4.7. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-04-20 19:57 Message: James, Assigning to you. Let me know what you need. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-04-20 18:37 Message: We had caught up to JUnit 4.5, but now need to re-up to 4.6. James Suchy, webmaster, has been looped in. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: CoSoCo (cosoco) Date: 2008-08-28 13:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1040495 Originator: NO I also would like to have Javadocs from junit.framework.* packages included in junit4.5.zip, like they are nicely published at http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.5/ . Regards, Ulf ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Marin Petr (mpetras) Date: 2008-08-27 12:15 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=2187323 Originator: NO Javadoc that is packed in the released junit4.5.zip does not contain any junit.framework.* packages, but Javadoc published at http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.5/ does. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Markus Keller (make) Date: 2008-08-20 15:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=239537 Originator: YES > This is fixed. Please close. Something is there, but * http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/3.8.1/ - is incomplite, e.g. misses junit.runner, junit.textui, ... * http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.4/ - is incomplete: misses org.hamcrest, - contains non-API stuff, e.g. junit.tests, junit.samples * http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.5/ - is incomplete: misses org.hamcrest ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ben (bjrady) Date: 2008-08-20 03:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1012272 Originator: NO This is fixed. Please close. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Markus Keller (make) Date: 2008-07-29 09:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=239537 Originator: YES Yesterday, http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.4/index.html was redirected to http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/4.3/index.html . Today, only the latter works. The former says "JUnit.org has undergone some changes...", and the link to "JavaDoc" in the header points to the outdated http://junit.sourceforge.net/javadoc_40/index.html . I have not found Javadocs for 4.4. http://www.junit.org/junit/javadoc/3.8.1/index.html is only partial (e.g. misses junit.runner and junit.textui). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2008-01-25 17:33 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=325156 Originator: NO I've requested help from the junit.org webmaster. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=1877429&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:14
|
Bugs item #2790537, was opened at 2009-05-12 09:31 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2790537&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: framework Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Denis Dzenskevich (leshij) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: assertNull(Object) should output failed value Initial Comment: When assertEquals(Object expected, Object actual) is failed, it outputs: java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<XXX> but was:<YYY>. assertNull(Object) could use the same message: expected:<null> but was:<YYY>. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:50 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2790537&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:13
|
Bugs item #2057721, was opened at 2008-08-18 15:01 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2057721&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jack J. Woehr (jwoehr) Assigned to: jsuchy (jsuchy) Summary: Website Lacks Build Info Initial Comment: Searched JUnit webbage for info on building JUnit itself and found none. Having downloaded junit-4.5-src.jar was confused finding no build.xml. David Saff was kind enough to help on mailing list, and suggested I open this tracker issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:48 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-04-20 19:58 Message: James, Where would "How to build JUnit" fit on junit.org? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jack J. Woehr (jwoehr) Date: 2008-09-02 19:29 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=174140 Originator: YES David, believe I started at junit.org and continued to sourceforge. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2008-09-02 19:00 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=325156 Originator: NO Jack, remind me: did you start from junit.org, or the SourceForge page? Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2057721&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:13
|
Bugs item #2785911, was opened at 2009-05-03 03:41 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2785911&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jon Kean (jonkean) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Experimental ParallelComputer bug fixes Initial Comment: The experimental ParallelSuite/ParallelRunner is awesome, but suffers from a few problems: - if a test takes longer than 2 seconds, the test is skipped and reported as passing (even if it completely fails!) - ParallelSuite does not work if a single class is listed in the suite (ParallelSuite is missing a constructor) - no limit on how many threads to use. Try running a 100 class test suite, and watch the system crumble. I've fixed these issues, and a patch is included here. It appears the ParallelComputer class is now inside the test folder, presumably because it's buggy state? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:48 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jon Kean (jonkean) Date: 2009-05-04 18:34 Message: Changes applied, pull requested ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-05-04 17:53 Message: Thanks for this! I already accepted a github patch that fixed your first bullet point. Could you fork http://github.com/saff/junit, sync your patch, and submit a pull request? Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2785911&group_id=15278 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...> - 2009-12-01 02:20:13
|
Bugs item #2021695, was opened at 2008-07-18 17:47 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sf-robot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2021695&group_id=15278 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: test runner Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Flo (flofh) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: RunNotifier is hard to use with Listeners Initial Comment: We want to attach our own listener to write output in our own format. So in our Runner we overwrite run(RunNotifier) to attach our listener to the notifier. Unfortunately we there is no chance to know from the RunNotifier if we already attached our listener to that instance or not. Adding multiple of our listeners would write out the events mutliple times, as the listener gets notified as often as it got added. Hence right now we keep track of that ourselves, maintaining a list of all notifiers we already added our listener to. That's not nice. Better would be to make the RunNotifier.fListeners a Set, or at least let the RunNotifier.removeListener return the output of fListeners.remove(listener), so that we know for how long we have to loop through it, to ensure we have 0 of our listeners in there and then can safely add 1 new one. I've seen that the methods are marked "Internal use only" however this was the nicest way I found to write the JUnit output according to our needs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot) Date: 2009-12-01 02:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-11-16 17:49 Message: This tracker is being shut down. Please move this item to http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Flo (flofh) Date: 2009-04-27 18:59 Message: We also added a return value to the test methods which our Runner transports to the listeners which have an extra method for that. This way a test can provide data for logging without throwing an exception. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Flo (flofh) Date: 2009-04-27 18:56 Message: We overwrite these methods of RunListener: testRunFinished, testStarted, testFinished, testFailure, testIgnored. Actually it was pretty tricky to figure out when which of those methods are called for the different cases of failures in @BeforeCalls, @Before, the test itself, @After, @AfterClass. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2009-04-20 19:15 Message: I'd like to find a better way to support the use case. Which methods in the listener do you use? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Flo (flofh) Date: 2008-08-25 07:44 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=716205 Originator: YES We are running them in two ways: In our own main class using JUnitCore.run(...) where we can add the RunListener and in the IDE where we found the only place to add our RunListener being in the runner itself. Obviously the IDE (Eclipse) does provide some output, but only the JUnit basics what is not enough in our case. Also the IDE doesn't write to a file, so the information is lost after we ran it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David Saff (dsaff) Date: 2008-08-11 14:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=325156 Originator: NO How are you running the tests? Traditionally, writing output is the job of the UI (textUI, IDE, ant, etc.), and not the JUnit classes or Runners themselves. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=115278&aid=2021695&group_id=15278 |